What do you drive…

[SignOfZeta]

Ever try to actually seat 5 averaged sized white boys in a camry wagon?  It aint a fun time.

Well yeah, the three in the back are usually supposed to be kids.

It fits in the compact-car parking spots at work.  That makes it tiny.

In the parking garages in my town anything that isn't a GMC Denali will fit in the compact spaces.

My point is that in 1988 the MR-2, Supra, Corolla, Tercel, the pickup, and the Camry sedan are all smaller than this car (not to mention all the kei cars they didn't sell in the US). It isn't "mini" just because your friends are huge.

[77FordTruckMan]

What it lacks in horsepower it makes up for in torque, the 351m is a high torque engine made for towing and hauling.

Yeah, 260ish ft/lbs stock and I'll be generous and say 300 ft/lbs with a 4bbl and full exhaust, which is roughly equivalent to a 351 powered eighth-gen f150.  Woohoo, feel the power and speed of blistering mid eights to 60 and 16s in the quarter!

Look, I don't have to argue with you, I know I'm right and I don't really care what anybody thinks. What do you drive anyway? a Bugatti Veyron?

[SignOfZeta]

Something people who drive old stuff have to come to grips with is that virtually everything made today is quicker than anything from 30 years ago. Sometimes the old stuff feels so fast just because the chassis is so shit and the noise is so bad that it feels like you are going 100 when you are only doing 30.

One of my favorite magazines did a performance test with an XKE and 356 versus a Odyssey minivan...the minivan ripped them both to shreds. Its an interesting read.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/

There are almost no cars being sold today that have less power than my 1.6 Miata from 18 years ago. Most V6 powered mini SUVs in 2011 can beat it 0-60. I don't give a shit. Since I can pull almost 1.2G in the corners on street tires I don't need to slow down very much at the track, and if you don't slow down, you don't need to speed back up again.

Have your fun and fuck what other people say.

[nectarsis]

What it lacks in horsepower it makes up for in torque, the 351m is a high torque engine made for towing and hauling.

Yeah, 260ish ft/lbs stock and I'll be generous and say 300 ft/lbs with a 4bbl and full exhaust, which is roughly equivalent to a 351 powered eighth-gen f150.  Woohoo, feel the power and speed of blistering mid eights to 60 and 16s in the quarter!

Look, I don't have to argue with you, I know I'm right and I don't really care what anybody thinks. What do you drive anyway? a Bugatti Veyron?

My old 86 Monte Carlo SS with   180 HP @ 4800 RPM/ 225 ft/lbs @ 3200 RPM (without the Holley 650 4bbl) was no slouch for it's size. Mind you your truck also weighed 1,500-2,200lbs more, so it could prob "hang with your BEAST." ;)   Frankly around here trucks like that are a dime a dozen...nothing special.  If you like it that'sgreat...but the internet dick waving isn't doing anything for ya.  It may be your fav vehicle of all time, but taking offense to others not being OMG over a 33 year old vanilla pickup...does it really matter?

 Bugatti Veyron?  I mean your talking about a pretty mediocre truck and someone who uses real world #'s (you don't like) so you counter with they MUST drive a $2,000,000 super car?  So if they don't drive an ubber car they aren't as "cool" as you and your truck?  Rolling Eyes
 

[termis]

That article was pretty interesting.  With driver aids like ABS and TCS becoming standard items on cars, it'd definitely making driving faster easier than years before.  Hell, I'm for all that for cars as I guess I'm just pragmatic when it comes to 4-wheeled vehicles.  Because of that, I don't get the whole appeal of "fast" trucks -- I mean, I really miss my trucks from the days when I lived in NA, but that's for utility reasons more than anything else.   I could care less how fast it'd goes up and down the road.

2-wheels, on the other hand -- I hate the fact that ABS and traction control is slowly making its way into that world...

[Arkhan Asylum]

My point is that in 1988 the MR-2, Supra, Corolla, Tercel, the pickup, and the Camry sedan are all smaller than this car (not to mention all the kei cars they didn't sell in the US). It isn't "mini" just because your friends are huge.

You do realize, the camry sedan and camry wagon are like the same length, and the wagon looks bigger because the trunk portion is part of the rest of the car?  It might be like, 6-12" longer, MAYBE.  but its still retarded and tiny. 

and, my 70 dodge dart with a 318 in it is faster than everyones modern cars.

[SignOfZeta]

Yes, I do understand the difference between a wagon and a sedan. I'm not saying your car is huge, I'm just saying that since it was one of the longest, of not the longest, Toyota sold in the US that year, it isn't "mini". Park that thing next to an 88 MR2 and you'll see what "mini" is. In the grand scheme of cars, its about right in the middle. If you don't see it this way, then you must live somewhere where your perception has been skewed from everyone driving giant-ass vehicles like...Ohio...or Michigan.

Termis: the reason the Honda van is quicker than the two sports cars is mostly the power. Also, the tires. They were using period correct tires on the old cars, which is a huge limitation. There is also the question of theoretical potential. If all three vehicles were allowed $3000 in modifications, I think the two cars would probably get much quicker, whereas the van is probably closer to its maximum in stock form. A 356 with modern day shock technology and race rubber would be fantastic. The power could be doubled and still be usable, where the van...I don't think the chassis could handle much more power than it already has.

I too don't get the whole "fast truck" thing. All trucks are slow. Some trucks are faster than others, but they are all slower than a car with the same engine, but turn/stop much worse and burn more fuel. There is a reason why none of the people in the NBA weigh 350 lbs. I have a 93 Chevy sitting in the back yard that I fire up four or five times a year when I want to go get a Xmas tree or move my tool box. That's all I need it for. The Miata is my daily driver and autocross/track day car. The Jetta is for longer trips, or when the dogs need to come with.

[NecroPhile]

What do you drive anyway? a Bugatti Veyron?

Yes; a Super Sport, in fact.

If you like it that'sgreat...but the internet dick waving isn't doing anything for ya.  It may be your fav vehicle of all time, but taking offense to others not being OMG over a 33 year old vanilla pickup...does it really matter?

Exactly; if you're gonna go all Fast and Furious on us, at least have the numbers to back it up.

One of my favorite magazines did a performance test with an XKE and 356 versus a Odyssey minivan...the minivan ripped them both to shreds. Its an interesting read.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/

That was quite entertaining; thanks for sharing.

You do realize, the camry sedan and camry wagon are like the same length, and the wagon looks bigger because the trunk portion is part of the rest of the car?  It might be like, 6-12" longer, MAYBE.  but its still retarded and tiny. 

It's small in comparison to full size cars but big compared to A and B segment cars.  Insisting that it's tiny (as an absolute) makes about as much sense as me asserting that an International CTX is small, just because it's not as big as a Cat 797F.

[BlueBMW]

My car dynoed at 114 at the wheels!  Fast and furious has got nothing on me!  Heheh

[blueraven]

One of my favorite magazines did a performance test with an XKE and 356 versus a Odyssey minivan...the minivan ripped them both to shreds. Its an interesting read.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/

Have your fun and fuck what other people say.

WONDERFUL!!

[SignOfZeta]

I'm going to a local dyno shop soon to put the finishing touches on the MS install. Stock power in a 1.6 Miata is 116 at the crank, ~96 at the wheels. With this ECU and the snorkle from a 1.8 I hope to get ~104. Regardless of peak power, the MS has improved mid-range torque enormously.

[BlueBMW]

I was testing before and after a chip.  I went from 107 whp to 114 whp.  The torque increased pretty even across the line.

[77FordTruckMan]

Something people who drive old stuff have to come to grips with is that virtually everything made today is quicker than anything from 30 years ago. .

Actually, the opposite is true in my experience, most cars today are 4 cylinders and some 6's, but back in the 60's-70's more cars had V8's, anyway, I am going to make a video to show you that the truck actually is fast, and I am not just being a jerk trying to show off.

[nectarsis]

Something people who drive old stuff have to come to grips with is that virtually everything made today is quicker than anything from 30 years ago. .

Actually, the opposite is true in my experience, most cars today are 4 cylinders and some 6's, but back in the 60's-70's more cars had V8's, anyway, I am going to make a video to show you that the truck actually is fast, and I am not just being a jerk trying to show off.

Yet many 4 & 6 cylinders put out more hp than a lot of old v8's.  Not to mention there are still plenty of v8's out there, just not as necessary as smaller engines can put out as much/more hp with better fuel economy/vehicles handle better, etc.  (see article Zeta linked above).  What's with all the  "my vehicle can beat your vehicle" 17 year old bravado mess?

[Arkhan Asylum]

who cares about fast cars anyways really.

I live in the city.  you never go faster than 35 because everyone else is driving like pussies, lol.

[SignOfZeta]

In 1980 a new Vette had 198HP, or something like that, out of 454CID. Today a VW Golf GTI has 210HP, out of a 4 banger that is 1/3 the size.

When I was a kid the big thing was being to do 0-60 in 5 seconds. There were only a handful of cars that could do it. The Buick GNX being the cheapest (a V6, btw), the Countach...a few others, mostly Italian. Now you can have this in a Subaru sedan for $30k (1/3 what the Countach cost).

Things have moved on.

[NecroPhile]

most cars today are 4 cylinders and some 6's, but back in the 60's-70's more cars had V8's

True, but the lesser V8s had 200-300 gross hp (only 160-240 net hp), which is easily bested by today's 260+ hp V6s and turbo four-pots.  Even the big block sedans of yore, such as the 454 powered Chevelle and the 426 powered Charger, could only manage mid-13 second quarter miles; today's equivalents (i.e. - SRT-8s, G8s, and SHOs) are even quicker, all while being more reliable, efficient, and able to stop or turn a corner.

[77FordTruckMan]

But it's just not the same, wheres the fun in it? New cars look like crap, and basically they are crap. They are cheaply made, they rely way too much on electronics, they are a lot harder to work on and they are very annoying to drive, I hate driving them. Also when something does break it cost thousands to repair and I doubt any of them will be lasting 30+ years. Old cars, and now I'm talking 1930's-60's were works of art down to every detail, compare that to new cars, they are crap. If someone gave me a brand new car and I could not sell it for some reason, I would let it sit and rot, they are totally worthless to me.

[blueraven]

My cousins 2009 AWD Mazda Speed3 has a 269bhp turbo 4-cylinder and a 6-speed gearbox. It gets 31mpg highway and is faster than a bat out of hell. In fact, it's power-to-weight ratio is astounding. It's gunmetal gray, has 18's with lo-profile tires, and a Bose Stereo. It's also $10,000 cheaper than any other car in it's class; It will go toe-to-toe with a new Boxter. And It's under 24k. 

It was more fun in the corners than a Fiat X-19, Got better mileage than a VW Rabbit pickup, had more power than a Corvette, and handled rough terrain better than any AMC Eagle; which I had (and fixed) as a pizza delivery car in the Midwest. ALL new cars are not "crap".

Regarding the truck being fast...

Having owned (and still own pieces of, technically) a 1978 Ford F Series; I am very familiar with your vehicle. I have replaced virtually every part on that 351 Modified engine, and have swapped a front clip, bed, and the entire cooling system. The shop I used to work for completely redid a 1979 Longbed for a customer, and installed a bored/stroked 351 Cleveland in the place of the original 351M. Due to it's hideous gas mileage, engine issues (rings, valves) and extensive cab rot (12 city, 16 Highway), I sold my 78 as a parts vehicle for the customer's project. The original motor was good for pulling stumps, and geared low with a 4-speed granny gear, (3.93 gears if I remember correctly) but it was a dog in the straight line. And the Quadrajet had a stove-choke that I rebuilt twice because the parts just disintegrated. I was glad to be rid of it after it started popping freeze plugs every month or so.

After we finished the newly redone 1979 Truck, the owner of the shop commented to me "He's got $15,000 into this truck before paint, and my daily driver can beat it off the line."

He then added a $10,000 paint job, air bags and 20" rims. The damn thing looks like a graffiti wall. He could've bought a Speed3 for that price, which I would drive in a heartbeat, but it really is what you like. How sentimental it is to you, and what you want out of a vehicle.

But I'll tell you dude, from experience, that truck ain't fast. It may be relative to what you have driven in the past, but it's no drag vehicle.

[SignOfZeta]

But it's just not the same, wheres the fun in it? New cars look like crap, and basically they are crap. They are cheaply made, they rely way too much on electronics, they are a lot harder to work on and they are very annoying to drive, I hate driving them. Also when something does break it cost thousands to repair and I doubt any of them will be lasting 30+ years. Old cars, and now I'm talking 1930's-60's were works of art down to every detail, compare that to new cars, they are crap. If someone gave me a brand new car and I could not sell it for some reason, I would let it sit and rot, they are totally worthless to me.

Part of this I agree with...the rest of it is just typical midwestern American nostalgia for cars they never actually had to deal with every day from a time they didn't live in,

Every time I see a car like this:




or this:



or this:



Or even this:



...I find myself moved nearly to tears...not just because I love the cars so much, and they are so gorgeous, but because there will never again be a time when things are made like this again. Now cars are mainly just iPods on wheels. It makes me sick.

On the other hand, cars from the 60s were basically slow-ass gas guzzling deathtraps that needed constant maintenance. In the 50s most GM cars had in their service recommendations to adjust the brakes every 5000 miles. Can you imagine having to go through that crap? Any cross country trip would almost always mean a blowout, tires in general were laughable crap, brakes were even worse. Most automatics were 2 speed boxes, and most manuals 3. The glass was non-tempered, and steering shaft a solid piece go to ahead of the front axle, and the interior...basically modeled after a kitchen knife drawer. So if you were in a wreck and you weren't slashed to pieces be the broken glass or impaled by the steering wheel you'd probably be mangled to pieces by the art deco radio knobs...at 25mph! Engines almost never went beyond 60k without a rebuild. Shocks were...shock technology barely existed, really. When was the last time you refilled the oil reservoir for your air filter? When was the last time you re-packed a wheel bearing for maintenance reasons? Adjusted ignition points?

Seriously, that stuff was utter fucking crap. I miss the handmade craftsmanship of it all, but people forget (or in your case, never knew) what just it really was.

A great medium ground is to take an old shell (the only good part) of cars like this and put in all modern stuff. Recently I saw a BMW 2002 with the engine from a E30 M3, now that's a good idea. Most of the stuff you see in Hot Rod and Car Craft and Retro Car, and magazines like that goes with this formula. Old shell, but new crate engine/management, new brakes, suspension, tires, seats, belts, etc. That's a hard one to argue with.

[77FordTruckMan]

But I'll tell you dude, from experience, that truck ain't fast. It may be relative to what you have driven in the past, but it's no drag vehicle. 

All I ever really said was it is a lot faster than average vehicles and it is, by a lot. in my parents Saturns, they have to turn off the air conditioning to make it up the hill where they live, where as I can hit 65 going up the same hill from being stopped at the gas station at the bottom. Anyway, I have been trying to buy a 75 Ford truck with a 390 from this guy for a few months now and it might finally happen this week, it is 4x4 with a 4"lift 32" tires and almost everything is like new on it. it has a racing cam, headers/duel exhaust etc., but it still has the 2bbl carb on it, which I plan to replace with 2 4 bbls. the 390 makes 300hp stock with the 2bbl, 340 with a 4bbl and 365 with a 6 bbl with everything else stock, so with 2 4 bbls and the other upgrades, it should make over 400hp, now that will be fast, it's already fast with 2bbl. I still love my 77 and I will never sell it, it is my first vehicle. Now if I have something else to drive I will be able to work on fixing it up. And by the way it has never broken down on me ever and there was never anything wrong with it that would have made it undrivable, I have taken it on a 250 one way trip with no problems and honestly I couldn't care less about gas mileage, it used to get 13mpg before the exhaust so now it's probably like 14-15 if you keep it on 2 barrels.I've spoken my mind on the whole car subject and I still think it seems like everyone is being brainwashed by the car companies and somehow I am not affected.

[termis]

Okay, that last post just explained everything. 

Ah, I remember when I was impressionable.

[nectarsis]

I've spoken my mind on the whole car subject and I still think it seems like everyone is being brainwashed by the car companies and somehow I am not affected.

LOL more you sound like a brainwashed teenager who is close minded. ;)

[77FordTruckMan]

I've spoken my mind on the whole car subject and I still think it seems like everyone is being brainwashed by the car companies and somehow I am not affected.

LOL more you sound like a brainwashed teenager who is close minded. ;)

quite the opposite really

[77FordTruckMan]

who is this person who brainwashed/impressioned me? No one agrees with me on this subject including my family and I just can't understand why people like new cars so much. I have read everything you've said and I do not agree with you so I guess I am closed minded on this issue, and we will all just have to agree to disagree.

[termis]

We're not talking just about new cars man.  Trust me, people who get it, will get what I meant.

[nectarsis]

who is this person who brainwashed/impressioned me? No one agrees with me on this subject including my family and I just can't understand why people like new cars so much. I have read everything you've said and I do not agree with you so I guess I am closed minded on this issue, and we will all just have to agree to disagree.

You seem to think (incorrectly) that EVERYONE IS GULLIBLE/BRAINWASHED that all new cars are THE BEST.  Considering all you seem to tout is older is OMG fast (that has been proven time and again to be false), and style (which is highly subjective)..you have proven nothing.  I for one love the STYLE of older cars, but performance, suspension, reliability not so much.  You keep mentioning who cares about gas mileage...but when I can drive something OMG FASTER than you and get much better mileage, with creature comforts...what exactly does an older vehicle "win" at that point?

The fact that NO ONE agrees with you should be a sign.  Oh that's right EVERYONE is brainwashed 

[SignOfZeta]

who is this person who brainwashed/impressioned me? No one agrees with me on this subject including my family and I just can't understand why people like new cars so much. I have read everything you've said and I do not agree with you so I guess I am closed minded on this issue, and we will all just have to agree to disagree.

Believe me, I totally get not liking the shiny new plastic crap. There is a reason I drive an original Miata instead of the new one with giant wheels and four cupholders (yes, it actually has four cup holders...in a roadster, WTF?). New cars are pretty lifeless. Even the new Ferraris just put me to sleep. Six polished Webber carbs are infinitely more cool than a six way adjustable differential. There is no comparison.

Here is the deal though. "Disagreement" is like...you like a different sports team, you like Chevys over Fords, you prefer the taste of beer to whiskey, etc. What you are going through is plainly belligerent denial. The moon landing actually happened, global warming is real, and your truck is slower than any F150 made today, as well as much much worse in the categories of handling safety and fuel economy. Its called "science", kid. The atomic weight of lead is 207.2. Its just is. Any "opinion" you have to the contrary is just wrong. For example: no Saturn needs to have its AC manually switched off to access off its power because the AC shuts itself off at WOT, like any other EFI car. Perhaps your drag strip rival had a broken TPS or, more likely, there are a bunch of Hello Kitty floor mats jammed under the gas pedal keeping it from moving all the way.

I won't say anything about reliability improvements in F trucks since 77 though. Ford has had some real reliability issues in the past 10-15 years so you may well be very far ahead in that way. In general though, most cars go 240,000 miles now needing nothing but scheduled maintenance if you don't wreck them or rust them out first, whereas that would have seemed like science fiction 34 years ago.

BTW, my 100HP 1.6 Miata gets about the same fuel economy as a new 500HP Vette. I'm not bothered by this exactly, but I'm certainly not proud of it.

On a related note, this car was in the news today:



Can you even believe there was a time when you could buy stuff like this? It just melts me, seriously.

[Sparky]

Jesus christ!!! your truck is nice looking.. just leave it at that..its a thread about what you drive.
If you want to make it into something more then go post your thoughts on a truck or car forum and see how you make out.

[blueraven]

Can you even believe there was a time when you could buy stuff like this? It just melts me, seriously.

This looks like the 1939 Muntz Jet that that guy pulled out of a barn and only had like 22% of the body and frame.

Am I correct this is a Jet?

Oh, BTW good call on the Alfa Romeo, Stutz Bearcat, Ferrari and the little Vauxhall as great examples of styling

[Arkhan Asylum]

stutz bearcats kick ass.

new cars all look doofy.

[turbogrfxfan]

wow what a car

[SignOfZeta]

This looks like the 1939 Muntz Jet that that guy pulled out of a barn and only had like 22% of the body and frame.

Am I correct this is a Jet?

Its a 1949 Delahaye Roadster, so somewhat retro looking for its time. This one was owned by Diana Dors, and just sold for three million.

Oh, BTW good call on the Alfa Romeo, Stutz Bearcat, Ferrari and the little Vauxhall as great examples of styling

Bearcat? Dude, that's an Aurburn speedster...or rather a kit car of one. Way WAY bigger, and 20 years newer. Also, the thing you thought was a Vauxhall is a Trabant.

You got the Alpha though, that's all that matters.

[NecroPhile]

It's also $10,000 cheaper than any other car in it's class.

Only if the class is limited to front drive turbo fours, of which the GTI is competitively priced (and a bit slower).  The V-6 Genesis Coupe, V-6 Mustang, Subaru WRX, and Lancer Ralliart are similarly priced and at least equally quick, plus they aren't wrong wheel drive and full of torque steer.

It will go toe-to-toe with a new Boxter.

No, no it won't.  The 3 is a pretty good car, but it can't match a Boxster's numbers for 0-60, quarter mile, slalom, skid pad, or track times, though it's pretty close on stopping distances.

... there are a bunch of Hello Kitty floor mats jammed under the gas pedal keeping it from moving all the way.

Mwuhahahaha!

[henrycsc]

I drive a 2000 Nissan Xterra, but now it has a little kick ass of its own. 

/clingzonk.jpg
/clingtg16.jpg
/clingexpress.jpg
/clingduo.jpg
/clingbonk.jpg

No they aren't official, but I did order extra of them so check out my trade list if anybody wants to do their own pimpin'. 

[SignOfZeta]

It's also $10,000 cheaper than any other car in it's class.

Only if the class is limited to front drive turbo fours, of which the GTI is competitively priced (and a bit slower).  The V-6 Genesis Coupe, V-6 Mustang, Subaru WRX, and Lancer Ralliart are similarly priced and at least equally quick, plus they aren't wrong wheel drive and full of torque steer.

Generally that is how class is defined, or at least mostly. Price is a factor, but not the most important one. A V6 Mustang isn't a similar car to a Mazda 3 in any meaningful way. Also, V6 Mustangs are just stupid. Any Mustang without a V8 is just...totally stupid. A muscle car with its muscles largely deleted. Pointless. Yes, I know the "week" Mustang is 300HP or something now, but its still totally stupid when the higher HP version is always out there, annoying you. What other purpose is there in owning a Mustang? Its awesome handling? Please, without modification the stock set-up has more understeer than a Pontiac Grand Prix. Its luxurious interior? No, its cheap shit. A Mustang is pointless without the biggest engine you can put in it.

[NecroPhile]

Generally that is how class is defined, or at least mostly. Price is a factor, but not the most important one. A V6 Mustang isn't a similar car to a Mazda 3 in any meaningful way.

I see your point, but seeing as they're similarly sized, similarly powerful, and return similar performance numbers, I lump 'em all together as "fun cars that are moderately fast and relatively cheap".  I don't really care if it's FWD, RWD, or AWD, nor do I care how many cylinders are under the hood; it's the end results that matter, not the tech. specs that got them there.

Also, V6 Mustangs are just stupid. Any Mustang without a V8 is just...totally stupid. A muscle car with its muscles largely deleted. Pointless. Yes, I know the "week" Mustang is 300HP or something now, but its still totally stupid when the higher HP version is always out there, annoying you.

There's always something faster, and not everybody has to have the biggest penis.  Besides, there's a big difference between $23,000 and $48,000 (V-6 vs. GT500 cost), and some people do worry about such trivialities.

What other purpose is there in owning a Mustang? Its awesome handling? Please, without modification the stock set-up has more understeer than a Pontiac Grand Prix. Its luxurious interior? No, its cheap shit. A Mustang is pointless without the biggest engine you can put in it.

To some people, Mustangs will never do anything but go fast in a straight line, but why pigeonhole 'em when the evidence shows that they're actually capable of turning a corner nowadays?  Go drive one sometime - you might be surprised.

[SignOfZeta]

I've never had the chance to really manhandle a current generation Mustang, but there are a great number of them at the local autocrosses. Once they are built to Street Prepaired class they seem alright, but anywhere near stock and they plow like a pig. Working the course when the Stock class new Mustangs are out there is like bathing in a shower of rubber dust. They SHREAD front tires almost as bad as a SRT-4 Caliber. I assume this is because Ford sets them up to be idiot proof. Maybe all they need is a smaller swaybar in the front.

Of course the fancier Roush versions with the independant rear end would fix this too, but that's really expensive. Way too much for a Ford, that's for sure.

[77FordTruckMan]

ok, I think I see what you are saying I don't really think everyone is brainwashed, and you did give a lot of reasons but in my opinion all the problems are a small price to pay.

[77FordTruckMan]

your truck is slower than any F150 made today

now I KNOW that's not true

[SignOfZeta]

your truck is slower than any F150 made today

now I KNOW that's not true

OK, whatever.

[nectarsis]

your truck is slower than any F150 made today

now I KNOW that's not true

OK, whatever.

Exactly Zeta, numbers don't lie.  Even the weakest driveline in the new F-150's beats it.  A 2011 V6 even more so (giggles).

[JoshTurboTrollX]

My 2006 Chevy Uplander will bitch slap all uze with its uber sexyness.  lol- Hey, so what if its a Minivan/SUV- I got a family of 6 and it has a entertainment package that allows for great Saturn and Turbo gameplay on long trips! 

My fuck bucket can be seen in the first few seconds of this video.

[Opethian]

did you know?

[Sparky]

NEW!!!! well for me and the family... 2006 KIA Serneto.....
fully loaded leather, V6, sunroof mother f@ckin seat warming bad ass bitch ... what a ride.......



compared to our old car below a 2001 KIA Rio.... but it was a great, owes us nothing & still runs great with 180,000
Giving it to my buddy for the city

[SignOfZeta]

If I had to chose from either of those...it would honestly be a hard choice. I think I'd take the Rio, even though from my experience its possibly the worst car I've ever driven, at least its not an SUV.

Is your last name "Kia" or something?

[Sparky]

That Rio is gut less as hell but once you get it going it rides great!!!!

Don't look down on me because its an SUV... it will be my wife's drive around town and with the 2 kids, 2 dogs and all our shit it will have the room for weekend trips only.
Will not be my commuter... i have a Saturn for that

[NecroPhile]

OMG, you've owned a whopping two Kias!  Are you Korean or own the company or something?  

[SignOfZeta]

In all fairness, Kia has come a loooong way from that piece of crap Rio. And it was comfortable once it was up to speed. I remember it having a large dead pedal and driver's arm rest that seemed like they were from a more expensive car. My problem wasn't the power though, it was just the general shittiness of everything. It wasn't a charming shitty like an air cooled VW Beatle or Ford Festiva either. Its just, "If we make this cheap enough we can steel %.5 of Toyotas bushiness, which is like 500,000,000,000,000 won, dude!" kind of shitty. Like, Naki PS1 controller kind of shitty. The sheet metal in the trunk deck, for example, was so thin and semi-formed I actually cut myself on it while loading the trunk. It also doesn't like being driven through the mountains with more than two people in it.

My question though is why anyone would own any Korean car except for the Genesis coupe. They are basically unlicensed knock-offs of of other cars, usually Hondas. If the $3000 difference in price is a make or break factor in so far as payments (in which case, you shouldn't probably have a car loan anyway, but that's another matter) I'd rather just have a two year old version of the Honda.

When I buy a car, I intend (have failed every time so far) to keep it for the rest of my life. It being brand new today is temporary. If I could stand to own an SUV for 10 seconds, I'd so much rather have a 6 year old Honda Element for half of what a new Kia cost. In 10 years the Element will still be a kick-ass little truck/car/box thing, and the Kia...it will probably have already been recycled by then because nobody really will love it enough to replace the automatic transmission in it when it eventually goes.

As usually, I just like cars too much.

[BlueBMW]

I like your cars sparky.  Don't lissen to the haters!   Kias have gotten a lot better over the years, maybe not as fast as hyundai but still.  There's no shame in going with economical cars.